Report: Cops stun Tampa woman pregnant with sixteenth child

A pregnant Tampa woman with 15 children says cops endangered the life of her unborn child when they recently used a stun gun on her during a scuffle, according to the Tampa Tribune.

Angel Adams, 39, who is eight-months pregnant with her sixteenth child, was stunned during a controntation in her home that happened when police officers tried to talk to one her sons about allegedly throwing rocks at another home in their neighborood.

53. There is no way that I see given the present attitudes,

152. I feel bad for her kids, but I have a difficult time scraping up any sympathy for her.

I've seen the video clips of her. She seems like an extremely immature and irresponsible person, and that's being kind.

I think there is resentment for the fact that she keeps having so many kids. I don't feel particularly sympathetic toward someone who has 16 children without any thought toward how she is going to raise all of them.

10. They can enter, any way they feel like, all they have to claim is, someone is in danger.

Had four cops bash my door and blow up bell, at midnite. Four guns in my face. They claimed I was throwing a woman into walls. One cop said he heard her cry for fifteen minutes.

Only problem was, I am a heart patient, living alone, and had nodded off at 8. They claimed that they KNEW I was guilty, cuz I said I didnt want them in my home. Were I black, as well as then poor, I too would have been tazed or worse. They likely grabbed hold of the son, prompting mothers protection. Then, mom was getting hurt, so daughter jumped in.

22. First, it was not witnessed by cops, and a misdemeanor at worst.

Next, the kid said he didnt do it. So, unless they have proof, it is the right of the mother, no matter how ill conceived, to ignore the cops.

They never pick a house at random, even in my case. They were retaliating for my busting a corruption racket, including cops and judges. Dont you think they remember her? They keep notes on persons. Pretty sure the neighbors hate her and her kids. Want her gone. She is in a house that is far too large for most welfare mothers, so is in an INNAPROPRIATE area.

I also had a neighbor that hated me, and likely called with the bogus accusations. My next door neighbor told me that a neighbor talked to her about setting me up for eviction or worse, as I have heart failure, and coughed more than he liked. So too could her neighbors call with the setup for her being bounced. In fact, throwing rocks, could get her bounced from gov help. Possible? Sure.

99. On the contrary.

I think I made the point that tasing a woman at eight months pregnant was wrong. Now I'm wondering why the cops felt they had a right to go into a house without a warrant on an alleged rock throwing case, when that kind of thing would never have been acceptable in my community.

127. Whoops, must have looked at the "responding to" section

132. Responses:

Post Number 16

Yeah, how difficult could it be

for a single female police officer to wrestle with two women at the same time and safely restraining one while not harming the other?

The female officer "was at the door, went in to talk to the kid, and at that point, he physically punched the officer, so at that point now we have a struggle," Tampa police spokeswoman Andrea Davis said. "While was struggling with that kid, the pregnant suspect and her daughter were fighting with officer."

Oh and that means there were 13 more kids hanging around somewhere. Never know if they're going to join in.

- - - -

The female officer walked into a house where she knew there were fifteen kids hanging around. She walked in without a warrant. And you are surprised by what happened? The correct procedure was to fall back and call fro backup.

-- - - - -

#20 Wait for what?
The SWAT team? Likely they'd be disciplined if they called in backup for every vandalism case they were sent to question a suspect about.

Remember that's what this all was about: a rock thrown through a window. Not an inherently violent crime (I don't think anyone was inside or it would have been treated differently). They had no reason to expect it would explode like that.

- - -

Yes, it was just a rock thrown through a window. So what was the rush? Why chase down a boy on an alleged complaint? And, here you're making excuses for the police: "Not an inherently violent crime. They had no reason to expect it would explode like that." And yet throughout this thread there are people who bring up past history on this woman that suggests otherwise. Given the history, (check out the Tampa Tribune) the cops were fools not to think it wouldn't explode this way.

- - - - -

#68 There was no need to retreat

the cops didn't come in guns ablazing. When a cop comes to your door and asks to speak with your son in relation to a crime you aren't defending him or yourself by attacking the cop.

And apparently this lady has been arrested for getting in to an altercation with her case-worker before. So I'm guessing that would have gone about the same way, but with more time and money wasted.

- - - -

Here you provide an example of what I just said. "this lady has been arrested for getting in to an altercation with her case-worker before. So I'm guessing that would have gone about the same way..."

Again, given the history this woman has had, her response would have been predictable with the cops. Anyone could have seen that she didn't expect the best from the police. She would have feared for her son.

Where I live, the cops would never barge into a house on an alleged rock throwing situation. They would have told the person that called it in that they couldn't pursue it without proof. Why are there two different sets of justice happening in the same state?

The right procedure was to find out who was providing all the assistance to this woman. That is who should have stepped in to help.

133. Response:

The female officer walked into a house where she knew there were fifteen kids hanging around. She walked in without a warrant. And you are surprised by what happened? The correct procedure was to fall back and call fro backup.

You know that she was aware of the number of kids in the house prior to entering?

Also it is not reasonable to assume children will set upon you, requiring a swat team to take them down.

I assume they know correct procedure better than you or I.

Yes, it was just a rock thrown through a window. So what was the rush? Why chase down a boy on an alleged complaint? And, here you're making excuses for the police: "Not an inherently violent crime. They had no reason to expect it would explode like that." And yet throughout this thread there are people who bring up past history on this woman that suggests otherwise. Given the history, (check out the Tampa Tribune) the cops were fools not to think it wouldn't explode this way.

So based on her history they should have treated her like a violent felon?

I suspect you'd have issues if they did.

Here you provide an example of what I just said. "this lady has been arrested for getting in to an altercation with her case-worker before. So I'm guessing that would have gone about the same way..."

Again, given the history this woman has had, her response would have been predictable with the cops. Anyone could have seen that she didn't expect the best from the police. She would have feared for her son.

Where I live, the cops would never barge into a house on an alleged rock throwing situation. They would have told the person that called it in that they couldn't pursue it without proof. Why are there two different sets of justice happening in the same state?

The right procedure was to find out who was providing all the assistance to this woman. That is who should have stepped in to help.

Again you're assuming these two cops were completely aware of her issues, that those issues excuse her behavior, and that a normal person would naturally assume this would explode in to violence.

137. I do believe that given this woman's two year public history,

that the cops in the neighborhood knew her situation--and the number of kids. I also think it was wrong for the cops to barge into the house without a warrant, or that they were fools not to suspect what would happen when they did. They are, afterall, cops and are taught to prepare for the worst. Which makes the tasing of an eight month pregnant woman all the more unacceptable.

And if the choices were between a swat team and the person known to them that has been helping them out, I would have picked the latter.

138. You "believe" this to be true

fine. That doesn't make it true though.

Tampa is a big place, over 300,000 people. I don't think it's fair to expect the police to be able to recognize all citizens by a glance. Even the more . . . temperamental ones. Let alone be able to draw out their family trees.

And you think a normal person assumes that questioning a kid about vandalism will necessarily lead to assault? You need new friends, because that is not normal.

Which makes the tasing of an eight month pregnant woman all the more unacceptable.

The tazing that occurred after two woman jumped a lone female officer.

And if the choices were between a swat team and the person known to them that has been helping them out, I would have picked the latter.

The person known to them was verbally abused last time. You think bringing that person back would have calmed the situation?

142. Cops generally have their own jurisdiction.

They don't patrol the entire City of Tampa.

And, yes, I am reasonably sure the police knew about this family. One might make the argument that it's because they knew them that they felt so justified in barging into the house. So that's not helpful to your side of viewing things.

I live in a State where a kid went for skittles and never came home and the cops did a piss poor job of investigating the matter. I live in a State where a twentish year old girl was tasered in the back when she was handcuffed and she hit her head on the pavement and is in a permanent coma. I think something is very wrong with someone who expects cops to be honest and never tell lies.

I mean, what kind of two-tiered country are we creating where we subject the poorest to the highest level of police scrutiny, and expectations for obedience, when the other tier tunes into inside information such as this one:

169. Yes you did

you claimed it was a "sophies choice" situation where she was forced to choose between the life of her son or that of her fetus. You said that. Don't back off now, it was so funny. You also claimed I was ok with forcing her to make the logical choice and sacrifice the son to save the fetus? Remember? Then you tried to claim it was a mother-only thing wherein no man could possibly understand the need to protect a child. Any of this ringing a bell?

And remember how she was arrested for verbally abusing that local person that was charged with providing her care?

Yeah, that would have cooled off the situation.

/also if you're afraid your son will go to jail how exactly is assaulting a police officer going to make things all better for him? They don't just forget about the crime because of your magical mama-grizzly powers.

173. I never mentioned murder.

You took the Sophie's Choice reference too literally. You're the one that made it sound like she had to chose the fetus in order to be a good mother, which meant that she was a poor mom for trying to defend the son. I'm the one that told you that such a decision is not possible for a mother to make and I explained why.

Instead of trying to put words in my mouth, look for a direct quote that says otherwise. I never said she had to choose "the life of her son over the life of her fetus."

That scenario was sealed the moment that police officer stepped in the house.

177. You made the claim that she had to choose between the two

you called it sophies choice.

These are things you said.

And you have yet to explain any real reason she would "fear for her son".

And even if we're to believe your now amended version that she was fearing for him going to jail, how is assault going to fix that? Are people being taught that if you attack a police officer your friends/family get off scot-free?

And I never said she had to choose between the two. The point is that there was NO REASON TO HAVE TO CHOOSE. Neither were in danger. Until she created a situation. It's not like there were nazis kicking in the door saying you must choose which one lives and which one dies (hey that'd make a good book and possibly movie, and opera). We're talking misdemeanor charges, at worst.

You really aren't getting that this isn't a mother/not mother thing. It's a crazy/sane thing. A crazy person sees cops and assumes "I must fight them or my son will die". Not a mother. Or rather, not because she's a mother.

As for choosing between the two, this is exactly what you said:
- - - -
You were careful with your fetus right?

It's precious to you and delicate.

Are these fair statements?

Ok so how eager were you to initiate a violent confrontation with 2 police officers while pregnant?

- - - -

The confrontation was in an effort to defend her son. As a mother, it was an impulsive thing she did which you cannot understand. You cannot understand it even a thimble full which is why you are arguing with me over a human behavior that anyone could have foreseen that understands motherhood. I can't help you with that. I told you, we are at a stalemate at a very critical point which is why neither one of us is going to concede.

148. This is where I'm confused.

Because anytime I've tried to make a report to an authority, nothing ever came of it. They wanted proof. To my knowledge, no cop ever went knocking on doors to start an investigation. They might have had a friend of a friend get involved to nicely find out what was going on, but no real police action. Especially not like what's described in the paper.

209. Tasering and beating pregnant women seems thirld world to me

210. There was no beating

and the tazering was in response to the pregnant woman and her adult daughter starting a fight with a lone female police officer.

You're trying really hard to spin this and I appreciate that you are in a bind here (what with the facts being so different from the narrative you feel compelled to create). But maybe consider that this woman wasn't a saint and the cop wasn't a demon.

143. "They were retaliating for my busting a corruption racket, including cops and judges. "

145. Not a joke, in the least, and I stopped a racket that targetted soldiers.

there was a story in the news just today, where a tow co. was confiscating soldier vehicles, and then selling them. Same kind of corruption, but instigated by cops, and corroborated by judges. Attorney General had their asses.

16. Yeah, how difficult could it be

for a single female police officer to wrestle with two women at the same time and safely restraining one while not harming the other?

The female officer "was at the door, went in to talk to the kid, and at that point, he physically punched the officer, so at that point now we have a struggle," Tampa police spokeswoman Andrea Davis said. "While was struggling with that kid, the pregnant suspect and her daughter were fighting with officer."

Oh and that means there were 13 more kids hanging around somewhere. Never know if they're going to join in.

20. Wait for what?

The SWAT team? Likely they'd be disciplined if they called in backup for every vandalism case they were sent to question a suspect about.

Remember that's what this all was about: a rock thrown through a window. Not an inherently violent crime (I don't think anyone was inside or it would have been treated differently). They had no reason to expect it would explode like that.

36. They had the option to call someone that knew the woman.

Her story was not unknown in the Tampa area. The police would have known who this woman worked with in the area that could have reached her. Instead, a simple alleged rock throwing turns into this big fiasco.

170. From the article:

The female officer "was at the door, went in to talk to the kid, and at that point, he physically punched the officer, so at that point now we have a struggle," Tampa police spokeswoman Andrea Davis said. "While was struggling with that kid, the pregnant suspect and her daughter were fighting with officer."

This is a lady who has been in regular contact with the law. And yet people are more than willing to make her a saint if it means they can make the cops devils.

171. THe lady is CRAZY. Even more requirement to social support up. Bring social workers. Something.

There have GOT to be better ways of dealing with anything cops dont like but tazing. Tazing will KILL me. Protest=death. Tazing harms MANY categories of humans. Mostly the most vulnerable. And it has become like washing a kids mouth out with soap. FAR too cavalier about safety, and like the beating they wish they could give. So, it is a COMPLIANCE TOOL. TORTURE, and terrorist threat.

"On Tuesday, police wanted to speak to one of her sons about throwing rocks at another home in the neighborhood. He said he didn't do it and ran from the police."

Why yes, that usually earns you a bullet in the back.

"Angel Adams says two officers – a man and a woman – forced their way into her home."

Once cops enter your home without warrant, and are throwing weight around, any slight movement of resistance, is charged as battery. Believe it.

174. The appropriate response is, get help.

And by that, mental and social help. Have those ready, that can negotiate with the distressed, and mentally marginal, to reduce violence. They have her record. They could almost GUARANDAMNTEE, that there would be some kind of trouble. AND IF there are mega amounts of kids there, and the mother IS arrested, they have many young souls to watch over. So, they could anticipate needing social workers, to calm the scene, and officiate. IF NEEDED.

6. To solicit comments like:

bigjohn652 at 10:21 AM May 8, 2012
This piece of trash has cost the taxpayers millions of dollars with 15 illegitimate kids and is pregnant with a 16th? And some of you Liberal idiots think we shouldn't reform the entitlement system? She probably has a $100,000 a year welfare income and spends it all on drugs, liquor and cigarettes from the look of her. I mean look how hot she is, NOT! What we need to do is spay this baby producing beatch and send her on her way. By the way I'd say the same if she were white.

Feed up2 at 10:05 AM May 8, 2012
What 39 years old 16 kids What???? Where is the Daddy or Daddies???? On welfare WHAT???????
She needs an appointment withg a Veteranarian to be spayed... Come on now WE the TAX PAYERS are paying this person to be a baby MACHINE.........
sTOP THE MADNESS!!!!!!!!!!!! STOP THE CHECKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GET A JOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

42. As I said before, anyone who would have these many kids

is out of her mind. She either does not have the cognitive ability to understand how she is complicating her life or is crazy and not thinking clearly or both. There are lots of people walking around out here who are in this position. Trying to reason with them is futile. Some need to be on meds or even under watch, but at the very least they need to be stopped. These kids are suffering from her madness.

58. Well, the authorities now have her where they can do anything they want to her.

54. But,

this is exactly what the GOP evangelical wing are calling for women to be like...baby machines, with no choice.

I realize SHE does have the choice now...I'm not disputing that and I also am aghast that she doesn't use birth control...but all I'm pointing out is that SHE IS EXACTLY THE MODEL OF WHAT THE GOP WANTS... if you look at the laws they are trying to pass.

24. Thanks for the video.

I don't question that this is a terrible case. There are a lot of things that crossed my mind about the kind of help and support this woman needed. It appears she got on the radar when her first common law husband was arrested. She has no means of support, and if she did, who would baby sit the children?

But let me ask you, to whom does it serve making her situation worse? If there is anyone who needs to be sat down for proper counseling, it is this woman. Tasing her is only going to make her situation worse and less agreeable to this kind of social service option.

So let's get back to the main issue. When is it ever proper to tase an eight month pregnant woman?

I believe the answer to that is never. Especially when officers could have waited to contact someone who could handle this situation in a more civil manner.

40. People seem to miss this obvious fact:

She put her child in risk by initiating a physical fight with a police officer. Either by tazing or physical damage (fighting isn't great for fetuses) or even by a bullet if things got really out of hand. She created a situation that put her kids in danger.

All she had to do was cooperate. Or scream at them if it makes her feel better. But assaulting a cop is not a wise decision for someone who values their physical safety.

71. How many suburban moms in nice neighborhoods would have responded the way this one did?

83. They would never have had to worry about it,

because the police would never have broken in.

Are you kidding? You know why they wouldn't have broken in? Because the police chief answers to the "key people" who pull the political strings in the city. If they go barging into a house without fully knowing who that person knows politically, those cops could be out of a job with just one phone call.

118. I've explained this thoroughly.

They needed to find someone that could speak to the family. The boy was not a flight risk. There was no need to rush into this thing. This is how it would have been handled in this community. Or at least, around my neighborhood.

76. What about her son?

You're expecting her to make a Sophie's Choice. Only a man cannot plainly see that.

The police should not have confronted a pregnant woman the way they did. Hormones are everywhere at this stage. At eight months pregnant with my first child I discovered I had a short fuse with customer service issues. At six months with my second child I couldn't even get through two back to back cases of the flu without emotionally feeling overwhelmed.

78. Sophies choice:

so literally she had to choose which of her kids would die?

Either fight with the cops and the son lives or don't and he dies.

Wow. You must think the cops are like in Judge Dred: they came there to execute her son for the crime of vandalism and that was it. And only by heroically smacking the female cop with her other daughter was she able to save her sons life.

he police should not have confronted a pregnant woman the way they did. Hormones are everywhere at this stage. At eight months pregnant with my first child I discovered I had a short fuse with customer service issues.

Ah so she was hormonal. Somehow I suspect if a male had made the argument that due to hormones she couldn't be expected to act like an adult you would take umbrage to that. Being cranky with customer service agents =/= hitting a cop.

/and by 16 I would think she should be well aware of the effects of pregnancy.

100. Provide evidence

she was famous. Sure. That means every cop in Florida knows her face?

And even assuming they do: how do you justify your requirement that cops treat people differently based on what they know about that person? If the police were to say they will start applying personal justice rather than uniform justice you'd be outraged.

97. The way you put Angel Adams down, that can only come

from a male perspective. But I could be wrong, so tell me, are you male or female?

Then, there's the police fraternity that everyone knows about. A person can't go through that kind of training and indoctrination without being affected by it. For all I know they sent a woman cop because they thought it would be less confrontational. And once it went over the line, easier to defend.

108. OH my God, how your argument is contorting.

You were the one who claimed she should pick one child over the other. I was trying to tell you why that's not possible for a woman to do.

In addition, I'll even throw into the pot that men have the same instinct to protect their young. This comes from an unexpected source: I watch these shows, the ones where people are building underground shelters, preparing for the final showdown. And in every case you have a white male who is armed to the teeth who claims he's doing it because he'll do anything to defend his children. Because you know, defending your young, that's a primal instinct.

Men have the same instincts to protect their young. I'm just saying that picking one over the other to attempt to belittle Angel Adams' choice, is not acceptable.

122. I think you should stop accusing me of lying. It's not very nice.

And it's not true.

You asked "what threat was he in?" I think when two cops come into your house without a warrant, there might be some fear that your child is under immediate threat. This is where it would have been helpful to give the family a chance to discuss the situation among themselves. This woman, who was eight months pregnant, had very little time to assess the situation.

I think that there are many minority communities who are fearful of the police. It would be dishonest not to mention that. The cops don't always do the right thing, and even when they get caught doing the wrong thing, they aren't reprimanded for it.

So that's a valid threat and concern.

Now, stop calling me a liar. Just because we don't agree on this matter gives you no right to disparage me.

129. "I think you should stop accusing me of lying. It's not very nice."

So stop lying.

I said she should not have endangered her fetus.

You made up the absurd comparison to Sophies Choice. You then used your own analogy to argue that I was in favor of forcing her to choose which kid died even though no one was at risk prior to starting this altercation and even then no one was going to die.

" Just because we don't agree on this matter gives you no right to disparage me. "

Again, that is a false statement. You have been disagreeing with me for some time. I only called you a liar when you began misrepresenting what I had said.

So to make what you claimed accurate you must A) prove that multiple children were at risk of death and B) show that I said she must choose which of them would die.

Instead what I said is that she put her fetus at risk. That doesn't imply that she did so to save another child.

131. That was actually a nicely developing thread

until you started throwing accusations.

Your point was that the protection of the fetus was all important because YOU, YOU, didn't see an immediate threat to her son.

I vehemently disagreed with that assessment. In light of what has gone on in Florida of late, nobody knows what to expect from law enforcement. Since we disagree on this main, critical point, our arguments will be unacceptable to either party. You will go on your merry way thinking that this was no Sophie's Choice scenario, the police are never Judge Dreddish, and I will see it from the other side of America.

139. See, circular argument. We're back to where we started.

Most mothers would not be able to make the kind of decision that seems to come easy to you. You have to be a mother to understand. For all the love she has for her unborn child, she has a history of diaper changes, and nose wipings, and huggings with her other children. A good mother won't make the kind of choice you're suggesting. She will step up to fight for the child she perceives is in danger. And, in Florida, she has the right to fear police action, because it's not consistent.

We're in an era where people are fighting back because they feel so helpless. Why do you think the Occupy movement is still picking up steam?

167. If you can't see that falling back on that old canard is an admission of defeat then I suppose

175. It's not defeat. It's a reality of debate.

There are critical points that neither one of us will yield. Once we reach this point, it becomes a stalemate. Which is no surprise since we're coming from two different sides of the American experience.

186. Four people die every month from being tazed.

A 2008 report (PDF) from Amnesty International found 351 Taser-related deaths in the US between June, 2001 and August, 2008, a rate of just slightly above four deaths per month.

Truth Not Tasers, which maintains an extensive list of deaths linked to conducted energy weapons going back to the 1980s, says Colliers is the 507th person in the US to die in incidents linked to the weapons.

46. I didn't see it either

I did see where the son admitted to running from the police. I am sure that police will pursue someone who runs from them and make an assumption based on that act.

What I don't understand, is how does a stay at home mom, with 12 children, afford a 6 bedroom house, food and healthcare. I, along with my spouse, work full time, have 1 child and still have to hustle to make ends meet.

160. Wait, they stunned her with a child instead of a taser?

164. Stupidity has consequences

She hit a cop.

Personally if I had done something this stupid as a kid, my mom would have smacked me upside the head for being an idiot. And I do know that my mom would be able to stay calm when watching me injure as she maintained enough self-control to deescalate a dog attack on me as a kid. Instead of panicking she remained calm until she could safely get the dog away without putting herself in danger.

Unfortunately, this woman seems to have a history of making poor decisions. 16 kids, an arrest for assault against a social worker and now assaulting a cop.

The question of the use of tazers should be a separate issue. Clouding it with the emotional issue of tazering an individual doesn't tell us anything relevant. I don't know the numbers for here in the U.S., but the numbers in other countries indicate that cops use tazers in situations that they would not have used violence in previously.

193. No warrant is needed

A warrant is not needed in this instance. Nor is the permission of the homeowner or resident. It's called fresh pursuit. The officer was trying to affect an arrest - the suspect resisted by running into his home. The officer, in "fresh pursuit" entered the dwelling in order to affect the arrest.

The mother should not have battered the officer. The officer was within means of necessary force by using a taser to stop the threat.

Maybe if people were more aware of the laws they would be less likely to blatantly break them, then cry fowl when they are met with the ramifications. Ignorance of the law does not excuse lawlessness.

198. RE: Pile on

I was merely posting factual information on what seemed to have become one of the main points of the discussion, prior to my chiming in. Many people were exclaiming that the woman's rights, mainly her 4'th Amendment right, had been unjustly violated by the peace officer for not having a warrant to enter the home. The fact is, given the information from the article, that no warrant was needed in this circumstance. That is not my opinion, That is fact.

Also, many were saying that the woman was unjustly tasered. While I may not agree with how the situation was handled, I was again presenting facts. The fact that when you batter a peace officer, there are ramifications. The woman CHOSE to do so in her current condition, which in turn caused a LAWFUL reaction. That is fact.

However, It is my opinion that many people do not know the laws in which they claim to. This, to me, is a problem. I think everyone should know the laws and what their rights are. IMO, Everyone should take the time to understand what their civil rights are the many loopholes that surround those civil rights. Again, Ignorance of the law does not excuse lawlessness.